101–110 of 136 posts
This is why DMCA is broken. Too easy for false claims. It’s plagued the music industry, YouTube, and now free software.
Why is it that as citizens we are powerless against such clearly broken laws as DMCA? Can't we do something about the situation, declare it unconstitutional or something?
Interesting tidbit: the hash they have for the infringed work it's the correct hash for ubuntu-20.04.2.0-desktop-amd64.iso [0] - this removes any good faith argument on their part. There is an infinitely small chance of collisions - but I would like them to produce a DMCA notice with the actual name of the infringed upon protected media, not just the hash. I believe Canonical should step in, since this is someone cla…
the relevant torrent link for your convenience: https://torrent.ubuntu.com/file?info_hash=K%A4%FB%F7%23%1A%3...
If companies which send copyright notices had to pay a hefty fine for each mistake they make, online world would be a bit of better place. Also the victim should receive a reasonable indemnization, as a way to encourage sharing of content.
I doubt it, they'd probably end up with some pausible deniability framework in place that still funnels the upside to them while eliminating any downside risk. Maybe if copyright claims needed to be bonded to cover any counter claims, it might get somewhere.
If DMCA notices are automated, and the automation is producing false positives, then they should still be held 100% liable. Fix your automation or remove it entirely. The potential ramifications of a false positive (Massive fines, getting banned from your ISP when they're the only option in town, and more) are too severe to allow any number of them greater than zero.
EDIT: And I think the penalty for a false DMCA takedown request needs to be gargantuan. Seven figures, minimum. DMCA trolling should not be profitable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, you have to demonstrate that it is actually in bad faith rather than just a cock up, and that's not going to happen (especially given it very likely is just a cock up).
>> (especially given it very likely is just a cock up "Here's the hash of the file you're infringing." I mean, where did they get that from? It's a rather specific thing for a very specific file from a very specific source. How can that possibly be a mistake? At best it's a result of some automation that indiscriminately makes these claims, which doesn't fall under "cock up" in my book.
at about the same time there was a practice of a running padfile, that you would ammend every time you retorrented so that the hash would change and make it hard to kludge out the distribution network by tracking known hashes.
in summary it think it is very possible to "forge" hash numbers and impersonate or obfusicate the content
hash collision is rare, intentional hash mimicry maybe is not so rare.
Related, an interesting side effect of CGNat use by ISPs with limited IPv4 space is an unreliability (without spending slightly more effort/money) in determining which customer was downloading at a particular time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it against the principle of innocent unless proven guilty? Also this law circumvents the court of law, which sounds like it could be in violation of some more foundational laws such as the constitution. Finally the law puts control over free speech in the hands of corporations.
That principle of jurisprudence is for criminal matters. The DMCA issues at hand are for civil issues: providing relief to a copyright holder against a potential infringer. The DMCA shields a provider like ISPs/Dropbox/Google/etc and compels them to take down content that a copyright holder claims is infringing (or provide counter-notice). I'd suggest an improvement to the DMCA would be to hold copyright holders resp…
I'd suggest extreme penalties for false DMCA takedown requests. Seven figures minimum for the first offense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an awful symptom of American cultural colonialism. They feed with one hand while slapping in the face with the other. Choke with your sitcoms and superheroes.
Yeah. And if you don't at least look like you're cooperating, the USA will put you in a literal naughty list of bad countries and develop "action plans" for dealing with it. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2019_Special_301_Report... You can't just isolate yourself from them either without massive economic consequences. Even if you suffered through those consequences, they'll probably just force you to trade anyw…
The section on Switzerland is just about how annoyed the government is at their privacy protections.
This is why DMCA is broken. Too easy for false claims. It’s plagued the music industry, YouTube, and now free software.
Why is it that as citizens we are powerless against such clearly broken laws as DMCA? Can't we do something about the situation, declare it unconstitutional or something?
Interesting tidbit: the hash they have for the infringed work it's the correct hash for ubuntu-20.04.2.0-desktop-amd64.iso [0] - this removes any good faith argument on their part. There is an infinitely small chance of collisions - but I would like them to produce a DMCA notice with the actual name of the infringed upon protected media, not just the hash. I believe Canonical should step in, since this is someone cla…
Could it be some pictures or sound or some firmware blob or something like that this is in that particular ISO is the actual content they consider to be pirated ?